28 May 2024

By Vic Moss

Congresswoman Elise Stefanik (R-NY-21) has once again set her sights on the commercial and recreational drone industries in the United States.

And we still have no true reason for any of this.

On May 15, Stefanik introduced the innocuously named Drones for First Responders Act. While it certainly would benefit First Responders, it would do so on the back of the commercial drone industry, as well as the recreational drone community. This bill, if passed, would decimate both of those communities. There is absolutely zero argument otherwise. And it’s disappointing to see both Drone Responders and AUVSI come out in support of it. 

While on the surface, this bill makes a lot of sense, and I believe the industry is on board with what the Congresswoman is trying to do for First Responders (in addition to farmers and ranchers, as well as those who work with critical infrastructure), that’s where our support ends.

Yes, we need to fund First Responder drone fleets, but not on the backs of those who use these aircraft to put food on their tables, or for enjoyment and relaxation. 

A Quick Summary of H.R. 8416 

• Increase the current tariff on all drone manufactured in China by 5% per year, up to a full 50%, +$100 on the 4th year after enactment. 

• And on January 1, 2030, no drones may enter the United States if they contain “flight controller, radio, data transmission device, camera, gimbal, ground control system, operating software, network connectivity hardware, or data storage manufactured in the People's Republic of China.”

• The new and expanded tariffs would then be used to set up a fund for First Responders, ranchers and farmers, and those who work for critical infrastructure. Those folks would be able to use money in that fund to replace their Chinese fleets.

Which means by 2029, we will be paying 50% more for our Chinese drones than folks in other countries (we already pay 25% more), plus $100. And no, I have no idea why they chose the additional $100 to be added by 2029. It seems terribly random.

I want to tackle what this will do to the recreational crowd first. It seems many times, these folks get left out of the discussion. This is too important to allow that to happen this time.

DJI and Autel account for the majority of drones used by serious recreational drone flyers in this country. And those that prefer something less expensive seem to favor such drones are EXO, Holy Stone, Ruko, Potensic, and others, all of which are made in China. And the mini FPV drones (EMAX, BETAFPV, etc.) are also made in China.

So, basically, if H.R. 8416 passes, and you want to fly drones recreationally in this country, you will be paying 50% more (+ $100) for drones that currently cost as little as $130 currently. That means you’ll be paying 225% of the current price to simply fly a toy drone in your living room. And that’s the cheap drone. If you want to fly something like the Potensic ATOM, you’re looking at well over $500 for a toy. Who is going to spend $500 on a toy to simply fly in their backyard or local park?

The Drones for First Responders Act will definitely affect this recreational community in a drastic and destructive way. There is no reason to sugar coat this. And we shouldn’t.

Commercial Drone Service Providers in this Country Will Lose

Now, let’s talk about what this bill will do to a multi-billion dollar industry. And not to put too fine a point on it, it will destroy it. Period, end of discussion. Not a single person can have a logical argument counter to that statement. Both of Stefanik’s bills, as written, will destroy the commercial drone market in the United States. 

Which is why we as an industry must speak out. We need to make sure that these bills die. They must never see the light of day. And odds are they won’t, so I don’t want to start a panic. I’m still cautiously optimistic that Congress will see past the rhetoric and lies that are crafting this paranoia and do that right thing by our industry. Less optimistic than I have been in the past, but still optimistic. I just hope I’m not being too Pollyannic about it.

A business, any business, must be able to choose the right equipment to provide their clients with the most cost effective and highest quality product or service they can. If the DFR passes, this eliminates that possibility. And if we’re forced to buy inferior products at an inflated price, then we can’t perform that most basic function of being in business.

What About Arguments For the DFR? 

But first we need to decide what the end game is for those who support either of these bills. There are only three possibilities.

• First is to destroy DJI.
• Second is to eliminate a suspected (unproven) security issue.
• Third is to bolster the U.S drone manufacturing capability.

Let’s address these one at a time.

If the end game is to destroy DJI, then the discussion is a non-starter. That’s just asinine. It conjures up an old Southern saying I used to hear growing up. "If you wrestle with pigs in the mud, you just end up getting muddy yourself. And then suddenly you realize the pigs enjoyed it." 

If the end game is to actually mitigate a potential (key word is potential) security threat, which by the way has never been publicly proven (key words are public proven), then let’s work on the actual issue instead of using it as a ruse to decimate an entire industry.

If we want to get serious about this, then Congress needs to put politics aside and craft a set of UAS specific cyber security protocols that would apply to ALL drones that are flown in areas with legitimate security concerns. And we really need to decide what areas actually have legitimate security concerns. The absurdity of the way it’s applied now is laughable. 

I know most of you have heard this story, but when I was hired to fly for the Mesa Verde National Park video, I had to use a Blue List drone. To Skydio’s credit, they were gracious enough to supply a couple of X2s for me to use. But the video suffered due to the fact that the Skydio X2 isn’t a video drone. I was completely the wrong tool for the job. Yet, when I had a chance to fly in Washington D.C., every drone we in the air was a DJI. 

So, I could’t fly a DJI in over ruins that are hundreds of years old, and where there are literally hundreds of thousands of images online, yet when we flew in Washington D.C., the most sensitive and monitored airspace in the country, each and every flight was made by a DJI drone. All just barely one block off of the National Mall.

If that’s not the definition of idiocy, then I don’t know what is.

So we need to pass Section 2209 (from the 2016 FMRA no less, meaning it’s already over eight years late!) in order to define what areas actually need protecting. And then we need to pass those cyber security protocols and mandate that all drones that fly in all 2209 designated areas, regardless of country of origin, must follow them.

If Congress would simply do that, then the security issue would be virtually moot when it comes to Chinese drones. Or any drones for that matter. 

And what about bolstering the U.S. drone manufacturing industry? Honestly, I don’t know a single drone operator that doesn’t support this. The issue comes when we try and decide the process by which this happens. 

As mentioned, the DFN calls for a yearly increase from the current 25% tariff on Chinese drones to a maximum of 50% (plus the random $100) after 5 years. And it calls for those taxes to be used to create fund for some to use (key word there is some).

Why not just write a bill that requires the current 25% tariff to be used to establish and grow that grant fund? That would immediately satisfy the need for those industries that would benefit from that fund. And it wouldn’t be such a burden on the commercial and recreational drone communities.

Also, what drone are these first responders, farmers and ranchers, and critical infrastructure companies actually supposed to buy? Because there isn’t a comparable drone there. Especially if those folks need to use something other than an enterprise level drone.

And the ban on Chinese drones (yes, it’s a ban, no matter how to verbally couch it) is putting the cart before the horse. Actually it’s putting the cart before the ability to buy a horse. If this ban takes place, there is not a single person out there who can look you the eye and honestly tell you with any certainty that there will be anything on the market to replace the prosumer drones we will no longer be allowed to use. And it's the prosumer drones (DJI Mavics, Minis, and Airs, and Autel Evos or EVO Lites, etc.) that are the ones the vast majority of commercial drone companies use, and basically the ones that 100% of the recreational drone community uses. At least those that fly DJI/Autel products. But remember, even the so called “toys” that are so popular with the recreational flyer also come from China. So back to square one.

Don't put a five-year ban on the bill. But a requirement that three years after the implementation of the 25% tax Congress study the ability of the market to manufacture drones to replace the DJI drone. "Build it and they will come" attitude only works for Kevin Costner.

Stefanik and her supporters aren’t listening to those this directly affects. We need to let them know.

What Can You Do About This? 

Reach out to your elected officials. Yes, I know we keep hammering this home, but it’s terribly important to do this now. We have some drone organizations supporting the DFR. They are getting in front of their elected officials. It seems to me that they can’t see the full true picture of what will happen if this passes. Or maybe don’t want to?

The best way to stay in the loop with this is to join Drone Advocacy Alliance. Go to the “Take Action” page and use our forms to reach out to your elected officials. And the links on the Take Action page also let you customize your emails. Do that. Tell a story about why this will hurt you and your family. Tell them how this will put you and 67% of all drone companies out of business. Help keep our businesses and hobby alive.

Join over 2,000 of your peers in letting Congress know that the Drones for First Responders Act and the Countering CCP Drones Act will decimate the U.S. drone market. It’s that simple. 

For even more up to date information, follow both bills on GovTrack. You can find both the CCCPDA and the DFR there. Sign up there for updates too. You can also find out who the cosponsors are of each of Stefanik’s bills. Target them too. Nicely, of course. You can find either your Senator or your Representative by going to this Congress.gov site and putting in your address. There are direct contact links there for each to them.

Congress cannot be allowed to pick the winners and losers of a multi-billion dollar industry. Especially if that decision isn't being based in the reality of its true affect on said industry.